![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 279, Issue 9, 7643-7654, February 27, 2004
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||




¶
From the
Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center and the
Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21231
Received for publication, August 26, 2003 , and in revised form, December 8, 2003.
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
/p48/IRF-9, have been identified (1, 2). These factors can function as transcriptional activators (e.g. IRF-1, IRF-3, and IRF-9), repressors (e.g. IRF-8), or both (e.g. IRF-2, IRF-4, IRF-5, and IRF-7). They all share significant homology in the N-terminal 115 amino acids, which comprise the DNA-binding domain, characterized by five tryptophan repeats. Three of these repeats contact DNA with specific recognition of the GAAA and AANNNGAA sequence (3). However, the unique function of a particular IRF is accounted for by a cell type-specific expression, its intrinsic trans-activation potential, and an ability to interact with the other members of IRF family or transcription factors and co-factors (4).
Three IRFs (IRF-3, IRF-5, and IRF-7) function as direct transducers of virus-mediated signaling and play a crucial role in the expression of type I interferon (IFN) genes and some chemokine genes, including RANTES (57). Whereas IRF-3 is constitutively expressed in all cell types (8), constitutive expression of IRF-7 can be detected predominantly in cells of lymphoid origin and can be further stimulated by type I IFN. The expression of IRF-5 seems to be restricted to dendritic cells and B cells (9, 10). In monocytes, and particularly in the precursors of dendritic cells (PDC2), which are high producers of IFN
, both IRF-5 and IRF-7 are expressed constitutively (11). In uninfected cells, IRF-3 and IRF-7 reside predominantly in the cytoplasm, but upon virus-induced phosphorylation of C-terminal serine residues, mediated by IKK
and TBK1 (12, 13), they translocate to the nucleus where they associate with other transcription factors and histone acetyltransferases, CBP/p300, forming a ternary complex, enhanceosome, binding to the promoters of IFNA and IFNB genes (5, 14). Whereas IRF-3 expression is sufficient for the expression of IFN
(15), RANTES (16), and some interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) such as ISG56 (17), IRF-7 has a critical role in the induction of IFN
. Reconstitution of IRF-7 expression in human cells that can express only IFNB gene resulted in virus-mediated induction of IFNA genes (18). These results demonstrate both the essential and distinct roles of IRF-3 and IRF-7, which together control the transcriptional activation of diverse IFN
/
genes in the antiviral response.
The importance of IRFs in the innate antiviral response is further supported by the findings that an increasing number of viruses have been found to encode proteins that target the function of these factors to overcome the antiviral immune response (19). The Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV/HHV-8) (20) contains a cluster of four genes (vIRFs) that encode proteins with homology to the cellular transcription factors of the IRF family. Three of these vIRFs (vIRF-1, vIRF-2, and vIRF-3/LANA2) have been cloned and characterized. They all show homology in the N-terminal region to the DNA-binding domain of cellular IRFs; however, the vIRFs lack several of the tryptophan residues that are essential for the DNA binding and thus, in contrast to cellular IRFs, vIRFs are not able to directly bind to DNA. The expression of vIRFs in the KSHV life cycle is distinct. vIRF-1 (ORF K9) is expressed during the KSHV replication cycle (21), and its expression is activated by the KSHV-encoded trans-activator, ORF50, and by an auto-activation of its promoter (22). In contrast, vIRF-2 and vIRF-3 are expressed during KSHV latency (23, 24).
Several groups have extensively studied vIRF-1. In a transient transfection assay, vIRF-1 was shown to inhibit both the virus-mediated induction of type I IFN genes and IFN-induced genes (ISGs) (2527). In addition, vIRF-1 overexpression in NIH/3T3 cells confers tumorigenicity when injected into nude mice (2830). These data, together with the observation that vIRF-1 binds to p53 and inhibits apoptosis, suggested that vIRF-1 might have an oncogenic potential (25, 3133). However, targeted expression of vIRF-1 to B cells or endothelial cells failed to induce tumor formation in transgenic mice2 (34). Moreover, it was shown that vIRF-1 binds not only to cellular IRFs but also to CBP/p300 and inhibits its acetyltransferase activity (25, 35), which results in a global inhibition of acetylation of histones H3 and H4 (26).
vIRF-2 (ORF K11.1) encodes a small nuclear protein (163 aa) that is constitutively expressed in primary effusion lymphoma (PEL) cells and specifically associates with several cellular IRFs and p300 (23). In addition, vIRF-2 also binds double-stranded RNA-activated protein kinase, PKR, inhibits its kinase activity, and blocks the phosphorylation of the PKR substrate, eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2
(36). An additional transcript, encompassing vIRF-2 spliced to the ORF K11, has been identified by gene array analysis (21). This transcript can be detected only in TPA-treated PEL cells, and the function of this protein has not yet been characterized (21, 37).
vIRF-3/LANA2 is a constitutively expressed nuclear protein encoded by ORFs K10.5 and K10.6 (21, 24, 37, 38). vIRF-3/LANA2 was also shown to bind to p53 (24) and inhibit p53-mediated transcriptional activation. A recent report (39) has shown that vIRF-3 also inhibits PKR-mediated apoptosis. In a transient transfection assay in NIH/3T3 cells, vIRF-3 was shown to inhibit the IFN-mediated induction of ISG15 promoter, and it was suggested that both vIRF-1 and vIRF-3 function as dominant negative mutants of cellular IRFs (25, 38).
The aim of the present study is to further characterize the function of vIRF-3. Here we show that vIRF-3 interacts with both IRF-3 and IRF-7 as well as with transcriptional co-activator CBP/p300. However, in contrast to vIRF-1, vIRF-3 neither competes with IRF-3 for binding to p300 nor inhibits histone acetylation. For the first time, we report that although vIRF-3 does not bind DNA, in virus-infected cells, vIRF-3 is tethered to the IFNA promoter by its association with IRF-3 and IRF-7. Finally, we provide evidence that the overexpression of vIRF-3 stimulates IRF-3 and IRF-7 transcriptional activity of IFNA and IFNB promoters and thus enhances virus-mediated induction of type I interferons in B cells. Our study reveals that in addition to its co-repressor function, vIRF-3 can also act as a transcriptional activator.
| EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Plasmids and AntibodiesFull-length vIRF-3 tagged with Myc (vIRF-3-myc; aa 1566), vIRF-3-N' (aa 1254), vIRF-3-C' (aa 254566) (38), IRF-3, IRF-7, vIRF-1 expression plasmids (8, 25, 40), IRF-3 (aa 1115), IRF-3 (1231), IRF-3 (aa 145427) (15), IRF-7(FL), IRF-7-N' (aa 1237), IRF-7-C' (aa 237514) (9), p300-N', p300-C', p300-C'-A, p300-C'-B, p300-C'-C (25), IRF-3-ribozyme, pU1/IRF-3 (41), and reporter plasmids, HuIFNB, A1, and A2 secreted alkaline phosphatase (SAP) (18), were described previously. GST-vIRF-3-FL, GST-vIRF-3-N', and GST-vIRF-3-C' were cloned by amplification of the vIRF-3 cDNA (aa 1566, 1254, and 254566, respectively) from the vIRF-3-myc expression plasmid and sub-cloned into pGEX-4T vector (Amersham Biosciences). The IRF-3 (aa 145231)-T7 was cloned by amplification of the IRF-3 region (aa 145231) using the IRF-3 expression plasmid as a template. The 5' primer carried a T7 tag sequence that was in-frame with IRF-3 open reading frame. The PCR product was sub-cloned into pcDNA3.1 vector (Invitrogen). The vIRF-3 antibodies were raised in rabbits against two peptides (n-VRLEKHRRRPRPFVGEC-c and n-CWDDGPRRHERPTTRR-c) and purified by protein A chromatography. Polyclonal IRF-3, IRF-7, p300, CBP, Myc, actin, and Sp1 antibodies were obtained from Santa Cruz Biotechnology. The M2 anti-FLAG monoclonal antibodies were purchased from Sigma; T7 antibodies were from Novagen, and acetyl-H3 and acetyl-H4 antibodies were obtained from Upstate Biotechnology Inc.
Transfections and SAP AssaysIn transient transfection assays, 2 x 106 cells were transfected with 10 µg of DNA by using Superfect (Qiagen). For SAP assays, equal amounts (2 µg) of reporter plasmid and IRF- or vIRF-expressing plasmids were co-transfected with
-galactosidase-expressing plasmid. The transfected cells were divided 24 h later and infected with Sendai virus for 16 h or were left uninfected. The SAP assay was performed as described previously (42, 43). Each experiment was repeated three times. The
-galactosidase expression levels were used to normalize the difference in transfection efficiency.
Immunoprecipitation and Western Blot Analysis293 cells co-transfected with various vIRF-3, IRF-3, and IRF-7 expression plasmids were lysed in co-precipitation buffer (20 mM HEPES (pH 7.9), 50 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 2 mM EGTA, 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 10% glycerol, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 0.2 mM protease inhibitor mixture (Sigma)). The protein extracts (400 µg) were then incubated with the respective antibodies. After extensive washing with co-precipitation buffer, precipitated proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and analyzed by Western blot.
Oligonucleotide Pull-down AssayThe DNA pull-down assay was done as described previously (5). Briefly, double-stranded oligomers corresponding to the huIFNA1 VRE region (bp110 to53) were synthesized and biotin-labeled at the 5' end of the antisense strand and coupled with streptavidin magnetic beads (Dynal, Inc.). Whole cell lysates were then incubated with the DNA bound to magnetic beads for 3 h at 4 °C. After extensive washing, the bound proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and analyzed by Western blot.
GST Pull-down Assay35S-Labeled proteins were synthesized in vitro by using the coupled TNT T7 transcription-translation system (Promega) according to the manufacturer's instructions. GST-vIRF-3 fusion proteins (0.5 µg) bound to glutathione-Sepharose beads were incubated with 10 µl of 35S-labeled proteins in 250 µl of binding buffer (10 mM Tris (pH 7.6), 100 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA (pH 8.0), 1 mM dithiothreitol, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.05% Nonidet P-40, 8% glycerol, 0.2 mM protease inhibitor mixture (Sigma)) at 4 °C for 90 min. After three 10-min washes with binding buffer, the proteins bound to the beads were resolved by SDS-PAGE. The gel was dried and exposed to a PhosphorImager screen. For GST pull-down assay with IRF-3 (aa 145231)-T7 deletion mutant, the bound proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and detected by Western blotting with T7 antibodies (Novagen).
Chromatin Immunoprecipitation AssayThe assay was performed using a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay kit (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.) following the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly, for the exogenous IFNA promoter studies, HeLa cells (5 x 105 cells) were co-transfected with 1 µg of IFNA1-SAP reporter and 2 µg of vIRF-3 or vIRF-1 expressing plasmids. At 24 h post-transfection, the cells were infected with NDV for 6 h. For the endogenous IFNA promoter studies, BJAB/vIRF-3 and BJAB/vector cells (107 cells) were infected with NDV for 6 h. The proteins bound to DNA were cross-linked in the presence of 1% formaldehyde; cells were resuspended in the SDS lysis buffer, followed by sonication. After pre-clearing with salmon sperm DNA/protein A-agarose (50% slurry), the protein extracts were subjected to immunoprecipitation with antibodies against IRF-3, IRF-7 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), acetyl-H3 (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.), and vIRF-3. Immunoprecipitation with p65 antibodies was used as a negative control. Immunocomplexes were extensively washed, and the DNA was recovered by phenol/chloroform extraction. For exogenous IFNA1 promoter analysis, the PCR amplification was performed with IFNA1-SAP-specific primers described previously (5). For endogenous IFNA promoter studies, the DNA template was amplified with universal primers corresponding to the regions of human endogenous IFNA genes that are conserved in all subtypes (18).
Reverse Transcription-PCR Analysis and Antiviral Assay1 µg of total RNA isolated by the Trizol method (Invitrogen) was reverse-transcribed to cDNA with oligo(dT) primers in a 30-µl reaction volume. From this mixture of cDNAs, IFNA, IFNB, RANTES, and
-actin were amplified by PCR as described previously (18). For the amplification of studied genes, the following primer sets were used: (i) huIFNA sense 5'-GTACTGCAGAATCTCTCCTTTCTCCTG-3', antisense 5'-GTGTCTAGATCTGACAACCTCCCAGGCACA-3'; (ii) huIFNB sense 5'-TTGTGCTTCTCCACTACAGC-3', antisense 5'-CTGTAAGTCTGTTAATGAAG-3'; (iii) huRANTES sense 5'-AGGTCTCCGCGGCACGCCTCGC-3', antisense 5'-CCAAAGAGTTGATGTACTCCCG-3'; and (iv) hu
-actin sense 5'-ACAATGAGCTGCTGGTGGCT-3', antisense 5'-GATGGGCACAGTGTGGGTGA-3'. The levels of biologically active interferons in the medium were determined by the antiviral assay on human fibroblast cells (for IFN
/
) using vesicular stomatitis virus as challenging virus or on bovine tracheal cells that detect only IFN
but not IFN
(44).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
70 kDa that is identical to the mobility of vIRF-3 encoded by the ectopic vIRF-3 cDNA in the permanently transfected BJAB cells. No increase in the relative levels of the vIRF-3 protein was observed upon TPA treatment, which correlates with the published data of Moore and co-workers (24) that detected the expression of vIRF-3 in the nucleus of PEL cells and therefore named it latency-associated nuclear antigen 2 (LANA2). The analysis of nuclear and cytoplasmic extracts isolated from BCBL-1 cells has shown that vIRF-3 is present both in the nucleus and the cytoplasm (Fig. 1B), whereas in BC-3 cells the majority of vIRF-3 can be detected in the nucleus. To examine the function of vIRF-3 in B cells, we established a human B lymphoma cell line, BJAB, stably expressing vIRF-3 tagged with Myc epitope. Expression of vIRF-3 in these cells, as detected with polyclonal vIRF-3 antibodies, has shown that the ectopic vIRF-3 is present both in the nucleus and the cytoplasm. Expression of vIRF-3 in BJAB cells results in neither morphologic changes nor the alteration of the growth rate. In addition, the vIRF-3 expression in BJAB cells did not modulate their ability to grow in soft agar (data not shown).
|
|
The interaction between vIRF-3 and IRF-7 was examined in BJAB/vIRF-3 cells by co-immunoprecipitation. To increase the relative levels of IRF-7, cells were pre-treated with IFN
(200 units/ml) for 16 h (9). As a control, we used a BJAB cell line that was stably transfected with an empty vector. Because IRF-7 is phosphorylated in infected cells (48), cells were also infected with NDV to determine whether the phosphorylation of IRF-7 is required for the interaction with vIRF-3. As shown in Fig. 3A, vIRF-3 co-precipitated with IRF-7 regardless of virus infection, indicating that vIRF-3 can bind to both the phosphorylated and unphosphorylated forms of IRF-7.
|
Interaction between vIRF-3 and the Transcriptional Co-activator CBP/p300 Interaction between IRF-3, IRF-7, and the transcriptional co-activator p300 has been shown to stimulate transcriptional activity of IRFs (5, 15, 46, 49). Inhibition of this interaction by adenovirus-encoded E1A or KSHV-encoded vIRF-1 resulted in the inhibition of the IRF-3-mediated antiviral response (27, 50). The association between ectopic vIRF-3 and endogenous CBP/p300 was therefore tested in vIRF-3-transfected 293 cells by co-immunoprecipitation. vIRF-3 interacts with CBP/p300 both in infected (data not shown) and uninfected cells (Fig. 4A). In contrast to vIRF-3, cellular IRF-3 interacts with CBP/p300 only in the infected cells (46). When the plasmids encoding the N- and C-terminal parts of vIRF-3 were transfected into 293 cells, only the C-terminal part of vIRF-3 co-precipitated with CBP/p300, whereas no binding between N-terminal part of vIRF-3 and CBP/p300 could be detected (Fig. 4A).
|
vIRF-3 Neither Blocks the Interaction between IRF-3 and CBP/p300 Co-activators Nor Inhibits the Acetylation of Histones H3 and H4 It was shown previously (27) that the binding of vIRF-1 and IRF-3 to CBP/p300 is mutually exclusive, thus vIRF-1 can effectively block the interaction between IRF-3 and CBP/p300. Therefore, we examined whether binding of vIRF-3 to CBP/p300 would also block the association between IRF-3 and CBP/p300. BJAB/vector, BJAB/vIRF-1, and BJAB/vIRF-3 stable cell lines were infected with Sendai virus for 6 h, and the interactions between CBP/p300 and IRF-3 were analyzed by co-immunoprecipitation. As reported previously, there is a strong association between CBP/p300 and the C-terminally phosphorylated form of IRF-3 (Fig. 5A, lane 2) (46). Although this association was blocked by vIRF-1 in BJAB/vIRF-1 cells, the IRF-3-CBP/p300 interaction was not affected in cells expressing vIRF-3 (Fig. 5A, lane 6 and 4, respectively). Li et al. (26) have shown that the interaction between vIRF-1 and p300 resulted in a drastic reduction of nucleosomal histone acetylation and consequent inhibition of cytokine expression. To determine whether vIRF-3 has a similar effect, we have analyzed and compared relative levels of acetylated histones H3 and H4 in BJAB/vector and BJAB/vIRF-3 cells. As shown in Fig. 5B, vIRF-3 did not inhibit acetylation of these histone proteins. In contrast, the relative levels of acetylated H3 and H4 were slightly increased in BJAB/vIRF-3 cells when compared with BJAB/vector cells. These results indicate that the interaction of vIRF-3 with CBP/p300 neither interferes with the binding of IRF-3 to CBP/p300 nor inhibits the histone acetyltransferase activity of CBP/p300 or possibly other acetyltransferases.
|
|
B (p65) antibodies did not result in any amplification product (data not shown), indicating that the precipitation and amplification of IFNA1 VRE DNA was specific.
|
To confirm and further support these data, we have analyzed the assembly of the enhanceosome on the endogenous IFNA promoters in the infected BJAB/vector and BJAB/vIRF-3 cells. The BJAB cells express both IRF-3 and IRF-7, and viral infection stimulates synthesis of IFN
(Table I). The BJAB/vector and BJAB/vIRF-3 cells were infected with NDV, and 6 h post-infection, the proteins were cross-linked to DNA. Subsequently, the chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis was performed as described under "Experimental Procedures." The primers used for the amplification of IFNA promoters were selected to detect a majority of the IFNA promoters. As shown in Fig. 7B, the input amplification of the endogenous IFNA VRE DNA was very effective and almost equal in both tested samples. After immunoprecipitation with IRF-3 or IRF-7 antibodies, the levels of IFNA VRE amplified from the DNA-protein complexes were about 2-fold higher in BJAB/vIRF-3 cells than in BJAB/vector cells. The IFNA VRE was also amplified from BJAB/vIRF-3 cells after precipitation with vIRF-3 antibodies, whereas only background amplification could be detected in BJAB/vector cells. There was also an increase in the binding of acetylated H3 to the endogenous IFNA VRE in the vIRF-3-expressing cells suggesting that the presence of vIRF-3 in the transcriptional complex enhances recruitment of acetyltransferases to the IFNA VRE. As a negative control, we used p65 antibodies that did not yield any amplification of IFNA VRE (data not shown). It should be noted that although we have not used the real time PCR, the amplification of the DNA was done under conditions that result in a linear amplification as we have shown previously (5).
|
4-fold. However, the co-transfection of IRF-7 and vIRF-3 further stimulated the IRF-7-mediated activation of the IFNB promoter by 2-fold. Similar results were obtained in virus-infected cells. Transfection of IRF-3- or IRF-7-expressing plasmids increased virus-mediated activation of IFNB promoter by
3-fold. Transfection of vIRF-3 also moderately stimulated the activity of the IFNB promoter. Moreover, co-transfection of vIRF-3 and IRF-3 or IRF-7 enhanced the IRF-3- and IRF-7-stimulated activation of the IFNB promoter in infected cells (1.7- and 2.2-fold, respectively). In contrast to vIRF-3, expression of vIRF-1 blocked the IRF-3-mediated activation of the IFNB promoter in both uninfected and virus-infected cells (2- and 3-fold, respectively), whereas it had a very marginal effect on IRF-7 transcriptional activity.
|
2-fold. The expression of vIRF-3 also resulted in a slight activation of the reporter construct. Co-transfection of vIRF-3 with IRF-3 further enhanced the IRF-3-mediated activation of the IFNA1 promoter in infected cells by about 2-fold. However, a stronger activation of IFNA1 promoter was detected in virus-infected cells after co-transfection of both vIRF-3 and IRF-7 (3.3-fold enhancement). In agreement with the previous results (25), vIRF-1 inhibited IRF-3-mediated activation of IFNA1 promoter in infected cells by
2-fold. As we observed for IFNB activation, vIRF-1 did not exhibit a pronounced effect on IRF-7 transcriptional activity. To support these data further, we have also studied the activation of the RANTES gene promoter. In co-transfection assay with RANTES reporter construct, vIRF-3 increased the IRF-3- and IRF-7-mediated activation of this promoter (data not shown). Altogether, these findings were rather unexpected, because both vIRF-1 and vIRF-3 were previously shown to inhibit the virus-mediated activation of murine IFNA4 promoter as well as type I IFN-mediated activation of ISG15 ISRE in mouse fibroblasts (25, 26, 29, 38, 55).
To determine whether vIRF-3 functions as a nonspecific transcriptional activator, like HSV-1-encoded ICP0, we examined whether vIRF-3 enhances activity of the minimal TK promoter. However, neither vIRF-3 nor IRF-7 modulated the activity of this promoter (Fig. 8C). In addition, vIRF-3 inhibited the IFN
-induced, STAT1-mediated activation of the GAS element-containing promoter (data not shown). These data suggest that the association of vIRF-3 with IRF-3- and IRF-7-containing enhanceosome specifically increases transcriptional activity of IRF-3 and/or IRF-7.
To determine whether the enhancing effect of vIRF-3 is mediated preferentially by its association with IRF-3 or IRF-7, we examined the effect of vIRF-3 on the activation of the IFNB promoter that is able to respond to IRF-3 only. Furthermore, to confirm that the IRF-3 is a critical factor in the vIRF-3 stimulation, we used the IRF-3-specific ribozyme, pU1/IRF-3, that can very effectively decrease the levels of the IRF-3 protein in the cells (56). The IFNB-SAP reporter plasmid was co-transfected with IRF-3, vIRF-3, or IRF-3-ribozyme to HeLa cells, and its activity was analyzed both in infected and uninfected cells (Fig. 9A). In correlation with the previous report (15), overexpression of IRF-3 in uninfected cells increased the transcriptional activity of the IFNB promoter. The expression of vIRF-3 increased the transcriptional activity of both the endogenous IRF-3 (2-fold) and ectopic IRF-3 (2.5-fold). Co-transfection of IRF-3-specific ribozyme effectively inhibited the transcriptional activity of IFNB, indicating the critical role of IRF-3 in expression of this gene (41). Furthermore, the vIRF-3-mediated enhancement was greatly reduced when the expression of IRF-3 was nearly eliminated by the IRF-3 ribozyme. The dependence of vIRF-3 stimulation on the presence of IRF-3 was seen also in the infected cells where both the endogenous and ectopic IRF-3s are activated by phosphorylation (14, 57, 58); therefore, the IRF-3-mediated stimulation of IFNB promoter is higher than in uninfected cells. In the infected cells, the IRF-3-ribozyme inhibited the vIRF-3-mediated activation of both the endogenous and ectopic IRF-3s. Thus, although the transcriptional activation of IFNB promoter requires co-operation between IRF-3 and NF
B factors (16), these data suggest that IRF-3 is a critical component for the vIRF-3-mediated enhancement of transcriptional activity of the IFNB promoter.
|
vIRF-3 Enhances the Expression of the Endogenous IRF-targeted GenesBecause we have shown that vIRF-3 stimulates IRF-3- and IRF-7-mediated activation of IFNA, IFNB, and RANTES promoters, we sought to determine whether the expression of vIRF-3 in BJAB cells also enhances expression of the respective endogenous genes. To this effect, BJAB/vector and BJAB/vIRF-3 cells were infected with NDV for 6 h or left uninfected, and the relative levels of IFNA, IFNB, and RANTES transcripts were determined by a semi-quantitative RT-PCR (Fig. 10). The expression of IFNA genes was analyzed with universal primers, which can detect a majority of the IFNA subtypes. Although none or low levels of IFNA or IFNB mRNAs were detected in uninfected BJAB/vector or BJAB/vIRF-3 cells, the virus infection more effectively stimulated the expression of type I interferon genes in BJAB/vIRF-3 cells than in BJAB/vector cells (Fig. 10, lanes 4 and 2, respectively). However, vIRF-3 was not able to stimulate expression of IFNA or IFNB genes in uninfected cells. Although RANTES gene was expressed constitutively in these cells, it was more effectively induced in infected BJAB/vIRF-3 than BJAB/vector cells.
|
/
and IFN
synthesized by virus-infected BJAB/vector and BJAB/vIRF-3 cells (106) were determined by an antiviral assay as described under "Experimental Procedures." As shown in Table I, NDV-infected BJAB/vIRF-3 cells produced
5-fold higher levels of biologically active interferon (IFN
/
) than control BJAB/vector cells. Similar results were obtained when only IFN
was analyzed. Infected BJAB/vIRF-3 cells produced significantly higher amounts of IFN
(325 units/ml) than BJAB/vector cells (50 units/ml). Neither BJAB/vector nor BJAB/vIRF-3 cells produced detectable levels of biologically active IFN in the absence of virus infection. Interestingly, the increase in the interferon levels produced by the vIRF-3-expressing BJAB stable line was higher (5-fold) than vIRF-3-mediated stimulation of IFNA and IFNB reporter constructs in HeLa and 2fTGH cells analyzed by a transient transfection assay. This indicates that other B cell-specific factors may affect the vIRF-3-mediated stimulation of interferon synthesis or that vIRF-3 can also affect the interferon production on the post-transcriptional or post-translational levels. In summary, our findings suggest a novel role for vIRF-3 in transcriptional stimulation of the IFNA, IFNB, and RANTES genes and possibly other cytokines and chemokines in which expression is controlled by IRF-3 and IRF-7. | DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Addressing the molecular mechanism of vIRF-3-mediated stimulation, we have shown that the effect is specific for IRF-3- and/or IRF-7-targeted promoters. vIRF-3 did not enhance the basal transcriptional activity of the minimal promoter of TK gene or the STAT1-mediated activation of the GAS element-containing promoter. Although the N-terminal domain of vIRF-3 shows some homology with the N-terminal DNA-binding domain of cellular IRFs, vIRF-3 does not bind IFNA or IFNB VREs but exerts its effects by directly binding to IRF-3 and IRF-7. While the association between vIRF-3 and IRF-3 can be detected only in infected cells, binding to IRF-7 occurs also in the absence of viral infection. The C-terminal half of the vIRF-3 protein associates with both IRF-3 and IRF-7. The domains through which IRF-3 interacts with vIRF-1 and vIRF-3 are partially overlapping; therefore, additional experiments are required to determine whether vIRF-1 and vIRF-3 interact with distinct regions of IRF-3.
Previously, it was demonstrated that the IRF proteins associate with acetyltransferases, CBP/p300, PCAF, and GCN5 (46, 49, 6062). The IRF-3-CBP/p300 interaction is important for the IRF-3-mediated activation of the type I IFN genes (14, 48, 63) in infected cells and for the histone hyper-acetylation at the IFNB promoter region (64). Lin et al. (35) showed that IRF-3 interacts with CBP/p300 through a 46-aa domain, designated IBiD, that is also involved in the association with vIRF-1. Thus vIRF-1 competes with IRF-3 for the binding to CBP/p300 and interferes with IRF-3 transcriptional activity (27) and induction of the antiviral genes. Moreover, binding of vIRF-1 to CBP/p300 may also interfere with the acetyltransferase activity of these proteins, because overexpression of ectopic vIRF-1 in cells resulted in an overall inhibition of histone acetylation (26). vIRF-3 also interacts with CBP/p300 and PCAF (data not shown); however, the interaction domain of vIRF-3 with p300 is distinct from IBiD. Thus, there is no competition between binding of IRF-3 and vIRF-3 to p300. Consequently, vIRF-3 neither interferes with the transcriptional activity of IRF-3 nor inhibits acetylation of the histones but slightly enhances it. These data indicate that the mechanism by which vIRF-1 and vIRF-3 modulate the transcription of the cellular genes may be distinct. Notably, microarray analysis has shown that overexpression of vIRF-1 or vIRF-3 in BJAB cells induces different transcriptional programs.3
The transcriptional activation of IFNA and IFNB promoters in infected cells is associated with the assembly of a multiple-component nucleoprotein complex enhanceosome on the VREs of the respective IFN promoters. Both IRF-3 and IRF-7 are the components of these enhanceosomes that also contain CBP/p300 (5, 14). Here we show by DNA pull-down and chromatin immunoprecipitation assays that vIRF-3 is recruited to the IFNA promoter in infected cells via its interaction with IRF-3 and IRF-7. There was no recruitment of vIRF-3 to the IFNA VRE in the absence of IRF-3 or IRF-7 binding. The IFNA enhanceosome also contains histone acetyltransferases as demonstrated by the association of acetylated histone H3 with the IFNA promoter in infected cells. In agreement with previous observations (26, 27), vIRF-1 decreased the binding of both IRF-3 and acetylated H3 to the IFNA1 VRE. Interestingly, vIRF-1 can also activate transcription when it is directed to the DNA by the GAL4 DNA-binding domain (65).
The molecular mechanism of the vIRF-3-mediated stimulation is not yet clear. It has been shown that IRF-3 homodimers, which are formed in infected cells, could activate the IFNB promoter (57), whereas the IRF-3/IRF-7 heterodimers were the major inducers of IFNA promoters (5). The binding of the IRF-3-IRF-7 complex to the IFNA and IFNB promoters, as well as the recruitment of IRF-1 and CBP/p300 acetyltransferase to these promoters, was also observed in infected human cells (5, 52). In this study, we have shown that vIRF-3 can bind to IRF-3 and IRF-7, and thus vIRF-3 may directly associate with the IRF3/IRF-7 heterodimer and increase its stability or the DNA-binding capacity. Notably, in infected 2fTGH cells, the vIRF-3 enhancement of transcriptional activity of the IFNA2 promoter, which is mediated by the IRF-3/IRF-7 heterodimers (5), was more efficient (6-fold) than the enhancement of the IFNB promoter mediated by IRF-3 homodimers (2.5-fold). Alternatively, vIRF-3 association with IRF-3 and IRF-7 may enhance the recruitment of CBP/p300 or another acetyltransferase to the enhanceosome. Further studies will seek the additional components of the IFNA and IFNB enhanceosomes and establish their role in vIRF-3-mediated stimulation of type I IFN genes expression.
The significance of vIRF-3-mediated enhancement of the transcriptional activity of IRF-3 and IRF-7 may extend beyond the activation of type I IFN and chemokine genes. Like vIRF-1 (25), vIRF-3 associates with a number of cellular IRFs, including IRF-1 (data not shown), that play a role in apoptosis (66), tumorigenicity (67), and the immune response (68). It remains to be determined whether any of these functions are modulated by vIRF-3. Also the identification of additional IRF target genes, expression of which is modulated by vIRF-3, deserves further evaluation. Although the aim of this study has been to determine the function of vIRF-3 out of the context of KSHV-infection, the role of vIRF-3 in the KSHV replication cycle needs to be addressed. It is unlikely that KSHV captured vIRF-3 to enhance antiviral response that would block its replication. Interestingly, several KSHV-encoded genes, expressed during the lytic KSHV replication cycle, target the functions of IRF-3 and/or IRF-7 or induce their degradation thus eliminating the induction of an antiviral response (25, 27, 69). Moreover, it needs to be kept in mind that vIRF-3 is a latently expressed nuclear antigen, and thus its primary role may be to facilitate the KSHV latency. The growth of PEL cells in vitro depends on an autocrine production of vIL-6 that can be expressed in PEL cells during KSHV latency, but its expression is substantially increased during lytic replication by KSHV-encoded transcription activator, ORF50 (Rta) (70). Recently, it was shown that the promoter of vIL-6 contains two ISRE-like elements that can be activated by type I IFNs (71). Whether vIRF-3 and IRF-3 or IRF-7 participates in the transcriptional activation of vIL-6 in latently infected cells remains to be examined. Finally, vIRF-3, which is unable to bind to DNA, can be tethered to the IFNA enhanceosome and increase its transcriptional activity through the interaction with IRF-3, IRF-7, and CBP/p300. This indicates that the spliced forms, which were identified for IRF-3 and IRF-7 (7274), may function not only as dominant negative mutants of the respective IRFs but could potentially stimulate the transcriptional activity of IRF-containing enhanceosomes. Future studies will determine the molecular mechanism of vIRF-3-mediated enhancement of IRF-3 and IRF-7 transcriptional activity as well as address the role of vIRF-3 in KSHV latency.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
¶ To whom correspondence should be addressed: The Johns Hopkins University/Cancer Center, 1650 E. Orleans St., Baltimore, MD 21231. Tel.: 410-955-8900; Fax: 410-955-0840; E-mail: parowe{at}jhmi.edu.
1 The abbreviations used are: IRF, interferon regulatory factor; IFN, interferon; KSHV, Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus; ORFs, open reading frames; FL, full length; RANTES, regulated on activation normal T cell expressed and secreted; NDV, Newcastle disease virus; aa, amino acids; SAP, secreted alkaline phosphatase; GST, glutathione S-transferase; PEL, primary effusion lymphoma; TPA, 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate; ISGs, interferon-stimulated genes; hu, human; VRE, virus-responsive element; CBP, CREB-binding protein. ![]()
2 B. Lubyova and P. M. Pitha, unpublished observations. ![]()
3 B. Lubyova, M. J. Kellum, A. J. Frisancho, and P. M. Pitha, unpublished results. ![]()
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|